I read in "A New Earth" about the Collective Ego, and I could not agree more. What I wonder is why it seems so threatening when it is less conscious than the individual ego. I find that I really hate that the collective ego has certain advantages, like the strength in numbers to coerce others(through physical, psychological, social, political or financial means), the certainty they have in their rightness and moral superiority, and their

When it seems like with the individual ego, I have noticed that it is even aware that it knows very little, and is usually very libertarian on absolutes, in the sense that they will only react and fight something in reasons for defense. So in general would not be overly concerned with others morals unless they effected them personally.

I came to understand that the whole apparent "strength" and "absoluteness" of the collective ego is really just an illusion, and a stubborn one at best. Similar to the socratic philosophy that there is more wisdom in accepting you know little, apart from claiming to know more. From the stance on consciousness, true consciousness does not rest on how much one knows. Yet why does it still seem threatening?

What I wonder is why it seems so threatening when it is less conscious than the individual ego. I find that I really hate that the collective ego has certain advantages

The collective ego is more unconscious due to the momentum and volume of people that have the same beliefs. That is why it seems threatening, but who/what is finding it threatening but the individual ego itself. So, when you see the ego structures in yourself, you can see thoughs same structures opporating on a larger scale. As you know it's an illusionary structure, but a persistent one. If you feel moved to try to make change within one of those structures, then do that, however it would have to come through awareness as unconsciousness can't change unconsciousness, it just breeds more unconsciousness and where collective ego is concerned probably even violence of some degree.

What I wonder is why it seems so threatening when it is less conscious than the individual ego. I find that I really hate that the collective ego has certain advantages

The collective ego is more unconscious due to the momentum and volume of people that have the same beliefs. That is why it seems threatening, but who/what is finding it threatening but the individual ego itself. So, when you see the ego structures in yourself, you can see thoughs same structures opporating on a larger scale. As you know it's an illusionary structure, but a persistent one. If you feel moved to try to make change within one of those structures, then do that, however it would have to come through awareness as unconsciousness can't change unconsciousness, it just breeds more unconsciousness and where collective ego is concerned probably even violence of some degree.

I have noticed that when people try to fight one collective ego, they end up creating a new collective ego. I see it in the protestant reformation, conspiracy theories, radical feminism, and liberal politics. But I do wonder where you draw the line. Like I have noticed on the internet, if someone writes something that goes against a collective ego, there are hoardes of negative criticisms. Which I will admit has been a tendency in the past for me, but to tell those off who leave nasty comments, especially when its in hoards. I remember some girl wrote a blog about how she hated living with her parents, and there were so many disrespectful comments, and I took the same low road to comment the commenters back with cussing, threats and plain hatred towards them. Of course I strongly identified and agreed with what this girl wrote, so I took the comments personally. Especially when I strongly disagreed with the commenters viewpoints. Yet I find I caved into the same kind of need to feel powerful over them.

Human history is a history of insanity. A few collective manifestations of human unconsciousness include Leftist Collectivist ideology such as Communism, Nazism and Islamism. Evidence clearly suggests that collectivist ideology nearly always ends up concentrating power and wealth in the hands of the few, such as with Crony-Capitalism/Corporatism/Socialism/Statism, with Keynesian style economics and it's consequent fractional reserve banking.

All of these things are evidence of the potentially threatening nature of the collective human unconsciousness. If thinking about these things causes fear and/or terror, then I'm not surprised.

All of these ideologies have one thing in common, they are all top down systems, that attempt to force individuals into a prescribed existence, concentrating power in the hands of a few.

True liberty is a bottom up approach, where the individual is empowered to transform and awaken. The threat that the individual feels, is the limiting and smothering nature of the collective, restricting the individual from living a life of their choosing.

“Wisdom is knowing I am nothing, Love is knowing I am everything, and between the two my life moves.” ― Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj

DavidB wrote: True liberty is a bottom up approach, where the individual is empowered to transform and awaken. The threat that the individual feels, is the limiting and smothering nature of the collective, restricting the individual from living a life of their choosing.

I have wondered if part of the problem is that the individual can too easily seek empowerment through collective means, and becomes what they wanted to avoid. Like the person who fights bullying by overpowering the bully(ies), and ends up becoming the bully themself, and the bully becomes the victim.

jtightlips21 wrote:I have wondered if part of the problem is that the individual can too easily seek empowerment through collective means, and becomes what they wanted to avoid.

Nearly always it appears. For example, a common mantra these days is the concept of equality. Of course, the idea of equality is an absurdity, as we are all different, having unique and variable strengths, weaknesses and abilities. I will never be an opera singer, or a professional basketballer for example. I can't sing nor am I tall enough.

Equality means that everybody must only run as fast as the slowest runner, all effectively finishing at the same time. This denies the natural ability for someone to run like the wind for example. The most common mistake made is equating equality with human rights. They have almost nothing in common. The former is top down, the later is bottom up.

So in attempt to create a fair and even playing field, they create the means for oppression.

jtightlips21 wrote:Like the person who fights bullying by overpowering the bully(ies), and ends up becoming the bully themself, and the bully becomes the victim.

In a perfect world we would all seek a win/win scenario all of the time, unfortunately this often doesn't happen. This is why presence is always so important, as it provides us with the perspective and clarity we require to make rational and compassionate decisions.

“Wisdom is knowing I am nothing, Love is knowing I am everything, and between the two my life moves.” ― Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj

I have also been noticing how the collective ego feels threatened just by someone out there who does not share the established collective opinion. Take many religious extremists who show constant aggression towards others, yet claim persecution when someone defends themselves, or refuses to give into them. Or with politics, I always hear them talking about freedom, yet in many cases, they are the first to call out for the prohibition against something they dont agree with. Like how I hear both on the Liberal and Conservative side about how about the violation of peoples rights, yet have no problem in trying to get something banned, because they see it as blasphemous, unpatriotic, unhealthy, or offensive.

From what I can understand about the ego consciousness, everything is finite, and truth is relative to power. And when it comes to morality or goodness, it is just either an irrelevant ideal, or conformity to power(Hence might makes right). Since it seems like the ego always wants to find fulfillment and worth through power. Since I find that most of our political problems have little to do with anything that directly affects us. Like how we can get so easily worked up if someone things we are going to hell, should be in jail, mentally ill, or should be impoverished. Yet, I find that we in the egoic state cannot help but be affected by other things outside themselves. I find that the problem is with the nature of finity, its always limited, or something the mind can grasp at.

In most religious traditions, union with God is seen as the ultimate goal, and which outside of God is only misery. I remember Psalm 90 perfectly describes the egoic state.

A prayer of Moses the man of God.

1 Lord, you have been our dwelling place throughout all generations.2 Before the mountains were born or you brought forth the whole world, from everlasting to everlasting you are God.3 You turn people back to dust, saying, “Return to dust, you mortals.”4 A thousand years in your sight are like a day that has just gone by, or like a watch in the night.5 Yet you sweep people away in the sleep of death— they are like the new grass of the morning:6 In the morning it springs up new, but by evening it is dry and withered.7 We are consumed by your anger and terrified by your indignation.8 You have set our iniquities before you, our secret sins in the light of your presence.9 All our days pass away under your wrath; we finish our years with a moan.10 Our days may come to seventy years, or eighty, if our strength endures;yet the best of them are but trouble and sorrow, for they quickly pass, and we fly away.11 If only we knew the power of your anger! Your wrath is as great as the fear that is your due.12 Teach us to number our days, that we may gain a heart of wisdom.13 Relent, Lord! How long will it be? Have compassion on your servants.14 Satisfy us in the morning with your unfailing love, that we may sing for joy and be glad all our days.15 Make us glad for as many days as you have afflicted us, for as many years as we have seen trouble.16 May your deeds be shown to your servants, your splendor to their children.17 May the favor[a] of the Lord our God rest on us; establish the work of our hands for us— yes, establish the work of our hands.

jtightlips21 wrote:I have also been noticing how the collective ego feels threatened just by someone out there who does not share the established collective opinion.

None of us share the established collective opinion. We all have unique perspectives, all individual.

There is of course, no collective without individuals, and therefore no collective. Absolutely everything is made up of little things.If we collectively share anything at all though, it is the human emotions, the collective share in experience, all but seen from an infinite perspectives, the all, the whole. The love I feel for example, is the love you feel, no separation. When I cry, the anguish and tears, I produce and the same as the anguish and tears we all produce, and sadness and laughter and joy.

Ironically, the collective is a sort of individual, and ought therefore thoroughly appreciate and nurture the nature of individuality, yet so often does not, for whatever reason.

“Wisdom is knowing I am nothing, Love is knowing I am everything, and between the two my life moves.” ― Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj

I had an interesting insight about how the Individual Ego has a tendency to victimize itself and see the Collective Ego as the oppressor. On the other hand, I have found that the Individual Ego often scoffs at the Collective Egos victimization. I know I am bad about this. For example, I find that I want to mock the Fundamentalist persecution complex, and see them as getting what they deserve for making trouble. Yet, I am more likely to see anyone who have been harassed by Fundamentalists as Victims, such as Homosexuals, or those who do not subscribe to an organized religion. Or to see authorities as oppressors, and laugh at them when they complain about being disobeyed.

What I find it comes down to it is the individualists way of making itself as superior to the collective without creating some behavior standard that everyone must conform to. This also reminds me of the way we often victimize indigenous societies and making imperial societies as the oppressors. This is not to say indigenous societies did not suffer under imperialism. But I find more and more it has become the new cool to victimize the individual, and treat anything that resembles the Collective Ego, primarily moralism and power as something it is okay to patronize and "Persecute". It seems like this is just a way to preserve the individual ego.

Sigmund Freud's crowd behavior theory primarily consists of the idea that becoming a member of a crowd serves to unlock the unconscious mind. This occurs because the super-ego, or moral center of consciousness, is displaced by the larger crowd, to be replaced by a charismatic crowd leader. McDougall argues similarly to Freud, saying that simplistic emotions are widespread, and complex emotions are rarer. In a crowd, the overall shared emotional experience reverts to the least common denominator (LCD), leading to primitive levels of emotional expression. This organizational structure is that of the "primal horde" – pre-civilized society - and Freud states that one must rebel against the leader (re-instate the individual morality) in order to escape from it. Moscovici expanded on this idea, discussing how dictators such as Mao Zedong and Joseph Stalin have used mass psychology to place themselves in this "horde leader" position

I find that the threatening nature can be due to our own identifications with the Collective Ego. I think that I easily identify with a Libertarian/individualist kind of collective ego. So I find in myself that I dont approve of any kind of coercion for non-defensive purposes, or passing judgment on someone who did nothing to you. I find that I hate when people take issue with things like homosexuality, political incorrectness, diet choices, or breaking purity taboos. However, I also find that I get irritated with people who conform to some label rather than be true to their own individuality. So basically my own collective ego says 1) No one has the right to use force on anyone or coerce through any violence for non defensive reasons, 2) No one has any business making judgments on others personal decisions or traits, especially when it does not affect them directly, and 3) People should be true to themselves, and stop giving into authority, duties, coercion, pressure or label centered expectations. In my head, I had always justified it with the belief that without some collective ego, there would be nothing to stop bullies and bigots from becoming authority, and that self righteousness, ugliness and uniformity would reign. This is at least the feeling.

jtightlips21 wrote: In my head, I had always justified it with the belief that without some collective ego, there would be nothing to stop bullies and bigots from becoming authority, and that self righteousness, ugliness and uniformity would reign. This is at least the feeling.

There is a place for government. Being libertarian (classically liberal) doesn't mean that there ought not be rules and laws governing civil behavior. A common libertarian belief, is that you have the right to live as you choose so long as those lifestyle choices do not impinge upon my right to live as I choose.

A constitutional republic like in the USA for example, has the role of government to uphold the constitution and defend the rights of sovereign individual liberty. The government can do this by restricting it's own interference in the lives of individuals and defending property rights, etc.

As always though, the cost of liberty is eternal vigilance. Vigilantly therefore, ensuring that the government not exceed it's powers given to it by the people, according to the constitution.

“Wisdom is knowing I am nothing, Love is knowing I am everything, and between the two my life moves.” ― Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj

In a nut shell, its a project to monitor the collective ego every 15 minutes. All the news of the world is translated into English & contextualized into a massive database that can be queried by anybody curious enough to find out what the world is thinking about at this very minute. Just like a volcanologist monitors & collect seismic data every minute to find out when the next big volcanic eruption or earthquake may take place, now data scientists may be able to predict when the next peaceful protest or armed conflict may breakout based on predictable patterns in the data.

If your familiar with amygdala hijack on an individual ego level. Whereby, the reptilian part of the brain gets hijacked by the fear response & acts with extreme irrationally.... & agresssion can escalate very quickly. Well the collective ego also suffers the same fate, a stampede by a group can quickly escalate in a crowd and cause severe crushing deaths due to the same mass irrationally. Same with armed conflicted between groups or countries. It all happens by the same mechanism a positive feedback loop propagating by the network or bandwagon effect...suddenly forms causing the symptoms or response to the very fear itself.... to suddenly & dramatically (lacking the conscious rational part of the brain) to feed directly back into itself... causing a dramatic increase in conflict.

Don't forget these wise words....

Franklin D. Roosevelt: "So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself—nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance",

It is so, so important for the collective consciousness, such as the data science community, to try & monitor & predict these positive feedback models & prevent the world from falling into mass hysteria (world war III).

What de-escalation policies are necessary to prevent a global conflict?

I have read about the US strategic - three pillar policy of maintaining US, China, Russia (equal global powers) in order to maintain an equilibrium of power balancing... Think of the equilateral triangle.

But what other policies do we need to ramp down an escalation of collective fear. My view is collective exposure therapy... where countries need to maintain unions or round tables. The United Nations is a very important component of world peace & global trade etc.

ashley72 wrote:The United Nations is a very important component of world peace & global trade etc.

In it's current form, the UN is inefective to contribute to world peace and trade, as a considerable contingency of that union is influenced by the OIC (the Organization of Islamic Cooperation) essentially the world governing body for the collective Islamic world, with 57 Islamic states voting as one block. The OIC is in effect, the head of the global caliphate. I for one, am not in favor of a globe influenced by sharia.

Much of the other members are influenced by Marxist ideology, which has a history of ruin and misery.

I'm also not in favor of an isolated foreign body having far reaching influences in the affairs of a sovereign state, much less influencing how I choose to live my life. Government ought to be as close to the community it represents as feasibly possible, so that the welfare of the local citizens are always in the forefront of their responsibilities. Distant concentrations of power such as the federal government or the UN, have very little interest in small remote locations they never see nor care about.

This emotional ego reaction you refer to is the pain body. The pain body is the emotional aspect of the ego.

Echart Tolle speaks at great length about the pain body and how it influences humanity at all levels from the individual to the collective, from family up to globally.

ashley72 wrote:Have you heard about the GDELT project?

No, but I'll check it out.

And I maintain (tongue in cheek) that humans suffer from having too small frontal lobes and too large adrenal glands.

“Wisdom is knowing I am nothing, Love is knowing I am everything, and between the two my life moves.” ― Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj

You guys seem well versed in politics, and have brought up numerous issues I couldn't begin to understand, much less talk about.

I would like to point out a far more subtle form of collective ego, but one that is equally destructive if not more. You guys mentioned the politicians and the political organizations.

But, how about the media and pop culture causing collective egos that can be found in any school worldwide, and which bully school kids ? Kids who are overweight, have ADHD, or are gay ? Bully them to the point of suicide ? At the age of 12 ?

How about the Hollywood/hip-hop worshiping collective egos that tell women they're supposed to look anorexic to have a hope of finding a partner ? Or that men who haven't slept with 100 women are losers ? Or that men without a white collar job are losers ?

The collective egos that are the reason that so many kind, intelligent, and special people find themselves home alone, drinking themselves to death on Friday evenings ... and watching the rest of the world partying their butts off from within a glass jar, having no access to acceptance.

These collective egos, in my humble opinion, are destroying the world. They're the reason we feel the need to give up on acceptance and love.

On a side note, if you really think about it, Charles Darwin was on the right track but very wrong ! It's the survival of the weakest that I have witnessed on this Earth, not survival of the fittest. It is the stupid and ignorant who enjoy themselves blissfully - the collective ego that we talk about, at the expense of those more enlightened.

How can a rose blossom in a pond of feces ? Pretty soon, there will no roses left in this cesspool.